Pilate unto him, Speakest thou not unto me? knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee, and have power to release thee? Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin. Jn. 19:10-11.

Jesus could only have been referring to either Judas Iscariot or Caiaphas the high Priest when he said theirs was the greater sin but what or who exactly was Jesus referring to when he said Pilate was 'given power from above' ?

The answer may not be as simple as many might seem to think. In Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting the message of reconciliation to us. 2 Cor. 5:19. Love covers a multitude of sins. 1 Pet.4:8b.

I assumed it was leading to "the power from above" which would be his Father and the word would be "power" not sin.

Jeanne, you missed your vocation. You would have made an astute theologian. You homed in on the exact problem word. If the assumption is that Jesus was referring to 'His Father' as the 'power from above'. How could God be said by Jesus to be complicit in even a 'lesser' sin, than Judas or Caiaphas? God cannot sin at all, otherwise God would be the ultimate hypocrite.

Also if Jesus was actually saying that Pilate had been given power by God, then Jesus was disdainfully uncooperative with God's representative. Jesus refused to answer Pilate's questions and dissed him in much the same way a Hippy might be disdainfully indifferent to a cop trying to arrest him for spitting on the sidewalk. Hardly the way Jesus would have answered questions if he thought His Own Father had invested his authority in Pilate, thus rightfully requiring from Jesus, respect for his divinely ordained authority.

Regards Chris. In Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting the message of reconciliation to us. 2 Cor. 5:19. Love covers a multitude of sins. 1 Pet.4:8b.

Yes but, if we are to accept that the Christian God (well, actually all deities have had this tendency) uses humans to effect what is to be His will, then granting authority to the ones, who would destroy His son and actually carry out that will is all part of the plan of which Jesus was aware.

If Jesus was aware of the plan, but the others were not and were used as a "means to an end" to bring about the "greater good" then Jesus had to play his part in the plan. He could not answer and he must disrespect Pilate ...and others before him...in order to carry out his Father's plan, even as he asked not to have to do this the evening before.

To my mind, merely granting some earthly authority to move the plan along is not the same as God approving of that authority as it is used otherwise.

The terms that are throwing me are of my own writing; "means to an end" and "for the greater good" and even the concept of "useful tools", although I did not use that particular phrase.

And you know where we hear them, right? Marxism. I do not want to take this thread down another rabbit hole, but the terms that came to my mind stunned me. I have often heard Marxists demand that others recognize that Jesus was a Marxist before his time, but never considered it at all as anything but ...wishful thinking on their part, maybe.

I do not accept that of Jesus's teachings, although some seem to be more along those lines. But are they truly? But..do not make this any but a brief foray into that thought, please.

In reference to the OP; are there explanatory verses that put this bit into better context?

In reference to the OP; are there explanatory verses that put this bit into better context?

I guess there may be elsewhere in the New Testament.

Something like: Eph. 6:12 for instance, perhaps or even 1 Cor. 2:7-8.

What I don't accept though is the notion that God was the 'higher authority' which was pulling the strings of all those sinful puppets. Believing that would require some seriously fanatical double predestination double think; I think.

Regards Chris. In Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting the message of reconciliation to us. 2 Cor. 5:19. Love covers a multitude of sins. 1 Pet.4:8b.

<<What I don't accept though is the notion that God was the 'higher authority' which was pulling the strings of all those sinful puppets. Believing that would require some seriously fanatical double predestination double think; I think. >>

Only if you do not accept that God knows how your life will go, sees all the possible paths, is aware of all interactions and their impact upon your life and still uses you, sinner or saint, to effect His will...and this all before you were conceived within your mother's womb. God is the master of double predestination, as I have been told from time to time.

Even if God did not directly "pull the strings" is God capable of using his fallen angels to work His will? In this case, His will was to have His son sacrificed for all humanity. How else to go about "forcing" Pilate's hand to commit the "sin" of condemning to torture and death the Christ?

The OP passage:

<<Pilate unto him, Speakest thou not unto me? knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee, and have power to release thee? Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin. Jn. 19:10-11.

Jesus could only have been referring to either Judas Iscariot or Caiaphas the high Priest when he said theirs was the greater sin but what or who exactly was Jesus referring to when he said Pilate was 'given power from above' ?>>

The high priest and Judas were playing their part, manipulated by forces around them to place them in positions in which the only path seemed to end with the trial and sentencing of Jesus. Again, God's will. Each before them played their part and the sins became progressive gathering steam, with one passing it on to the other to the final conclusion, but the phrase that comes before that is "given thee from above"...God. Satan? Is Satan ever referred to as a "higher authority" granting power from above?

Or is Jesus saying here that the first actor, the power from above, that caused his ultimate death was the one with the greater sin? If so, then that is the ultimate power of God's will, which caused him to be born to walk this path and to whose will Jesus finally submitted himself fully.

It doesn't seem to fit into the "sin" mode, but unless there is a mistaken translation, which is completely possible, the phrasing leads me to my conclusion, albeit one from a novice.

<<What I don't accept though is the notion that God was the 'higher authority' which was pulling the strings of all those sinful puppets. Believing that would require some seriously fanatical double predestination double think; I think. >>

Only if you do not accept that God knows how your life will go, sees all the possible paths, is aware of all interactions and their impact upon your life and still uses you, sinner or saint, to effect His will...and this all before you were conceived within your mother's womb. God is the master of double predestination, as I have been told from time to time.

Even if God did not directly "pull the strings" is God capable of using his fallen angels to work His will? In this case, His will was to have His son sacrificed for all humanity. How else to go about "forcing" Pilate's hand to commit the "sin" of condemning to torture and death the Christ?

I see God's omniscience differently than do most predestinists, I think. God knows how my life will go, because omniscience means having the ability to see past-present-and future as one homogenous vista of 'events'. That does not mean however that God actually 'caused' every one of those 'events' to occur. 'Events' are simply either natural cause and effect or are influenced by someone making a 'choice' between certain actions which affected the falling into possibility and therefore perhaps into reality of certain alternative future 'events'.

Under such omniscient oversight it would presumably be possible for God to determine at some future or past point in time that 'Things would work out alright OK in the end', so it was OK to start a universe 'in the beginning'. Especially if by intervening half way through the process, to take all the suffering entailed by everybody participating in his 'experiment with reality', UPON HIMSELF, in the form of an inexplicable incarnation, and voluntary sacrificial death, (truly the act of an omnipotent God who refuses to use his omnipotence to 'throw his weight around', but rather becomes as vulnerable as any other infant of his species of choice. i.e. human).

So in a sense, God already knows what we will do before we ever do it, but it is still us that decided what it was we would do and who or what we would do it to. God just sits back and watches the tapestry of time weave itself according to our individual choices between the options open to us each in our moments of choice.

Thus an omniscient God would be able to know the result of all the choices ever made and placed himself deliberately in the situation where His creatures would make those choices freely but still bring about the eventual outcome that God decided would make the creation of a universe a worthwhile project in the first place. So He went ahead with it.

Does that make any sense at all, I wonder?

The high priest and Judas were playing their part, manipulated by forces around them to place them in positions in which the only path seemed to end with the trial and sentencing of Jesus. Again, God's will. Each before them played their part and the sins became progressive gathering steam, with one passing it on to the other to the final conclusion, but the phrase that comes before that is "given thee from above"...God. Satan? Is Satan ever referred to as a "higher authority" granting power from above?

Actually YES. 'given thee from above' could quite possibly refer to Satan's usurped position as pretender to be ruler of the Kingdoms of The World.

And above whom? Presumably above Pilate. That could simply mean he was calling Pilate a puppet of a higher political power.

What this means in effect is that The World's Political Systems give their allegiance, (in part or in whole), not to God but to Satan, the evidence of which is the injustice perpetrated by corrupt political systems. Matt. 4:8-10. The 'Political Power' they exercise however is granted them by GOD, but usurped to be misused and subverted to serve the purposes of Satan. Thus we have Jesus Christ refusing Satan's offer to "Give Him all the Political Power Satan possessed, if only Christ would wield it in ways approved of by Satan. (Bow down and worship me simply means, offer me your complete obedience, and do things my way).

Or is Jesus saying here that the first actor, the power from above, that caused his ultimate death was the one with the greater sin? If so, then that is the ultimate power of God's will, which caused him to be born to walk this path and to whose will Jesus finally submitted himself fully.

I can't see Jesus attributing even the lesser SIN to God. God is sinless. No but I can see him attributing sin to the power that has been delegated to Pilate, via The Senate, via Caesar, via Satan as supreme usurper of God's legitimate Sovereignty and perverter of God's will on earth.

I have noticed one thing though. Luke 1:78 Luke 24:49. Heb. 1:3. Where Jesus and others refer to the power of God, rather than human power, they use the term 'On High', denoting a top down hierarchy, presumably indicating there is no higher power than God. When referring to human or demonic power they usually use the term 'above', denoting a bottom up hierarchy, (looking from beneath, from the human standpoint), presumably indicating ascending levels of influence over human affairs.

Regards Chris. In Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting the message of reconciliation to us. 2 Cor. 5:19. Love covers a multitude of sins. 1 Pet.4:8b.

Would you say that your concept of how God works His will to effect His plan is different from the concept that some Christians hold?

If God watches the tapestry develop, but does not place his hands on the shuttle or alter the weft, how is it that God is said to perform miracles in answer to supplication?

Miracle is defined as "a surprising and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws and is therefore considered to be the work of a divine agency." Just for clarification...

You conclude:

<<I have noticed one thing though. Luke 1:78 Luke 24:49. Heb. 1:3. Where Jesus and others refer to the power of God, rather than human power, they use the term 'On High', denoting a top down hierarchy, presumably indicating there is no higher power than God. When referring to human or demonic power they usually use the term 'above', denoting a bottom up hierarchy, (looking from beneath, from the human standpoint), presumably indicating ascending levels of influence over human affairs. >>

Would you say that your concept of how God works His will to effect His plan is different from the concept that some Christians hold?

Inevitably, not all Christians hold the same views. I even admit to being a bit of a maverick when compared to tight laced doctrinaire cookies who meekly follow the party line of their denomination or sect, without thinking things through for themselves. (I do this however within the disciplines of my own denomination. It respects my independence, I respect its trust).

If God watches the tapestry develop, but does not place his hands on the shuttle or alter the weft, how is it that God is said to perform miracles in answer to supplication?

Maybe those times are rare examples of when God stops the loom to add a new thread, i.e 'to cotton on'. (Maybe the pattern suggests to him the possibility of improvement), then He stands back again to look how it affected the overall pattern. He does seem to be a generally 'hands off' kind of God nowadays, perhaps he is having his lunch while the loom goes on in auto. After all omniscience enables him to know nothing untoward is going to crop up while he takes a break.

Miracle is defined as "a surprising and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws and is therefore considered to be the work of a divine agency." Just for clarification...

Hmmm. Natural or scientific laws as understood by which generation? What may have perfectly fitted that definition 300 years ago may not apply 300 years in the future and there are many things once considered miraculous which are perfectly explicable with modern understanding.

Jesus said "Greater things shall you do because I go to the Father". That 'because' is interesting because John's Gospel was deliberately written to be read by future generations of searchers for truth. The 'because' can only mean either 'because I will not be around for you to be constantly relying on me to do your miracles for you', or'I'm going up to God to arrange for you to have superpowers of doing what I could not do when I was down here alongside you all". I prefer the first option. It fits well with the notion that Jesus started the ball rolling, (curiosity / gain understanding / now can do), and fully expected we would do the rest, given enough time and enough curiosity.

You conclude:

<<I have noticed one thing though. Luke 1:78 Luke 24:49. Heb. 1:3. Where Jesus and others refer to the power of God, rather than human power, they use the term 'On High', denoting a top down hierarchy, presumably indicating there is no higher power than God. When referring to human or demonic power they usually use the term 'above', denoting a bottom up hierarchy, (looking from beneath, from the human standpoint), presumably indicating ascending levels of influence over human affairs. >>

Humph. Why didn't you write that in the beginning?

It didn't occur to me until I researched and wrote it. You might say it was a 'cottoning on moment', I get them from time to time. Maybe God stopped the loom for a moment and added another colour to the tapestry of our lives. That's a nice thought isn't it.

Regards Chris. In Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting the message of reconciliation to us. 2 Cor. 5:19. Love covers a multitude of sins. 1 Pet.4:8b.